Subject: RE: Performance -- Re: [xsl] RE:"*NEVER* use for-each" From: "Evan Lenz" <elenz@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 16:05:44 -0800 |
Patrick, Curtis W wrote: > Please note that the use of "for-each" is not a design requirement, but > rather an implementation detail. Perhaps that misunderstanding > was the root > of your earlier project failures. It's quite possible that I'm misunderstanding what you're saying here, but the flexibility, modularity, and power of template rules often certainly do make template rules a "design requirement" over using xsl:for-each. I would definitely not consider one approach over the other as an "implementation detail"; just look at the difference between the two examples I gave in my last post (Subject: Template rules vs. XQuery). Granted, template rules (or an equivalently confusing recursive named template) are not absolutely necessary for many use cases, but from a design standpoint template rules lend themselves toward easier maintenance and reusability (eg. xsl:import) than if only xsl:for-each is used. Evan Lenz XYZFind Corp. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Performance -- Re: [xsl] RE:"*N, Anjul Srivastava | Thread | [xsl] using MSXML3 as XSLT for pars, Awasthi, Anand |
[xsl] Question on subtotaling, Parinit Girde | Date | RE: [xsl] RE:"*NEVER* use for-each", Chris Bayes |
Month |